On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 12:57 PM, P. Larry Nelson <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > zxq9 wrote on 6/13/2012 12:32 AM: >> On 06/13/2012 06:44 AM, Konstantin Olchanski wrote: >> >>> (On this list, are we really required to say "TUV" instead of >>> "***censored***", >>> as if we were playing a 1984 double-speak live action game?) >> >> >> Yes, because lawyers have made even casual conversation a legal minefield >> for >> reasons other than getting disappeared by the Thought Police. >> >> Pretty much anything trademarked, burdened by customer guarantees of any >> sort, >> or otherwise encumbered in any way should be referred to obliquely on this >> list. >> This sounds silly, I know, but the reason is that the labs who support >> this >> project don't have the bandwidth or the desire to even open a conversation >> about >> how to open a proper, legal, trade protections unencumbered conversation, >> and to >> that end terms like "TUV" are used around here. >> >> Not that TUV is a bad player -- *far* from it -- but why even open the >> door in >> case the wind starts blowing the other way? > > Could someone who maintains this list (Connie? Pat?) please confirm or deny > this seemingly absurd policy! > > I have not searched the archives of this list, but of the 1824 messages I > have saved locally over the years, for one reason or another, 333 of them > contain "Redhat" in the body of the message, while another 74 contain "Red > Hat". > I don't recall anyone ever getting their typing fingers slapped. You forgot to check for RHEL. :)